Feedback-ID: i0fe9450f:Fastmail
Date: Mon, 25 Nov 2024 09:42:49 +0900
From: Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>
To: Thomas Munro <thomas.munro@gmail.com>
Cc: Peter Eisentraut <peter@eisentraut.org>,
	Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net>,
	Tristan Partin <tristan@neon.tech>, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>,
	pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: On non-Windows, hard depend on uselocale(3)
Message-ID: <Z0PICeukFeEutR83@paquier.xyz>
References: <CA+hUKG+Yv+ps=nS2T8SS1UDU=iySHSr4sGHYiYGkPTpZx6Ooww@mail.gmail.com>
 <CA+hUKGLs9ccA7pUfphZOuf_fcVq2FAai7Cm0pmbQk0Qcs4VoVQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CA+hUKGKOuA4vTkFk01RSLqyM0pzNjYm-3h2zAtW48Ffc7FjjNg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CA+hUKG+ue0KC5KSqMuL5zi7uCSuXCLP_B+sZSq5=yS84606ZsA@mail.gmail.com>
 <423491f5-2eaa-454e-8dc9-037d69c1a8f9@eisentraut.org>
 <CA+hUKG+fApBC7Ziq2HP6K-6ymD=AafyvYQq9HGfyRCoBw-PGtQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <d9e7731c-ca1b-477c-9298-fa51e135574a@eisentraut.org>
 <CA+hUKGLbEhVb029AQJDCZ4+QgcqVmERJGZefxS=+b+SBBSGW8A@mail.gmail.com>
 <2652c576-29b3-4b4a-b61b-10275cacadcb@eisentraut.org>
 <CA+hUKG+iJtpun-sFqRYgJQt7eWEZnrsG_i=d_PRyHBqGrahCQw@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha512;
	protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="c1pofLNIuQ80CZp4"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <CA+hUKG+iJtpun-sFqRYgJQt7eWEZnrsG_i=d_PRyHBqGrahCQw@mail.gmail.com>
Archived-At: <https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/Z0PICeukFeEutR83%40paquier.xyz>
Precedence: bulk


--c1pofLNIuQ80CZp4
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Sat, Nov 23, 2024 at 10:32:31AM +1300, Thomas Munro wrote:
> I realised that there is another aspect to this: it must be impossible
> to build PostgreSQL with the original MinGW/MSYS project by now.  I
> don't understand the history of the MinGW/MinGW-w64 fork, but if
> they're both still live projects out there adding to the general
> confusion about the frankenwindows multiverse, we should clarify our
> situation.  As far as I know, we're only testing the second thing, and
> only the second thing can use UCRT, and only the second thing is a
> viable alternative toolchain for software that is primarily targeting
> current Visual Studio, which I think is something we can say about our
> project.  Right?

FWIW, I am not seeing any advantage in mentioning MinGW at all at this
stage, just extra maintenance burden.  As far as I know, MinGW is a
gcc port that has only a 32b implementation.  MinGW-w64 is built on=20
top of it and it includes *both* 32b and 64b implementations, as you
say, with more WIN32 APIs than the former.

So +1 to simplify a bit that stuff.
--
Michael

--c1pofLNIuQ80CZp4
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
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=JsDE
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--c1pofLNIuQ80CZp4--